Our View: On ... and on ... it goes between Israelis, Palestinians

Comment

Journal Star

Writer

Posted Jul. 16, 2014 at 7:09 PM
Updated Jul 16, 2014 at 7:10 PM

Posted Jul. 16, 2014 at 7:09 PM
Updated Jul 16, 2014 at 7:10 PM

The situation has gone from bad to worse in Israel, with the military confrontation in Gaza now entering its 10th day. With imprecise aerial bombardments producing a diminishing and even counterproductive return — including the deaths of four Palestinian boys on a beach Wednesday that previously had been pretty much off limits to missile strikes — Israeli government officials are planning for a ground invasion.

Israel has far superior military resources and so there’s little doubt as to what the outcome would be — a relatively quick takeover of the strip of land now governed by the Palestinians that is among the most densely populated in the world. The inevitable occupation after that is another matter, which potentially has a lot of downside for Israel and is a burden — economic and otherwise — the nation’s leadership no doubt doesn’t need or want. That said, Israel can’t very well tolerate Hamas-fired rockets flying over its border, either — some 1,200 of them in the last week and a half — even if the vast majority are either taken out by the country’s Iron Dome defense system or do not hit their intended targets.

It’s a mystery what Hamas hopes to gain from all this. Israel captured and occupied Gaza in 1967 and effectively withdrew its settlers and soldiers in 2005, though it has controlled the borders and limited the flow of people and supplies across them since. Why the locals would want Israeli soldiers back is beyond us, since it threatens their governance of Gaza, and especially since the stated goal of some in the Israeli government is “to ensure that all Hamas terrorists run away, are imprisoned, or die.” Maybe a desire for martyrdom explains it. Perhaps it’s an attempt to win world opinion, which may be helped along by the disproportionate casualty counts; at this writing one Israeli had been killed compared to more than 200 Palestinians, about 75 percent of them civilians. Or maybe it’s to get tangible help from sympathetic Arab neighbors who, if they have little else in common, at least share a contempt for Israel — though if past is prologue, that won’t materialize to any extent.

Peoria is a long way from that part of the world — more than 6,000 miles, in fact — and it can be hard to tell from such a distance the bad guys from the good guys. Perhaps posing a few questions would help. Which side knowingly started this latest escalation in hostilities with the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers back in June? Have those believed responsible been arrested by the Palestinians, as Israel has arrested and begun prosecution against six of its own alleged to have carried out a revenge killing against a Palestinian teen? Which side honored, however briefly, the ceasefire requested by the United Nations and arranged by Egypt (though in fairness, Hamas says it was not invited to the table)? Which side has warned residents in neighborhoods targeted for missile strikes, through multiple means of communication, to evacuate and spare themselves and their families harm, and which side has urged them to stay and face the consequences for the cause?

Page 2 of 2 - The Israelis are not perfect or entirely pure and sometimes act provocatively themselves, and they seem to have an extremist element the government either is unwilling or finds difficult to police. By virtually all accounts the Palestinians in Gaza live in miserable conditions, restricted from coming and going as they please and seeking opportunities for themselves, subject to harassment and sometimes worse, which arguably aggravates the desperation and nothing-to-lose mentality that lead to wars like this one.

That said, in previous editorials we’ve invoked the analogy of, say, Cuba firing missiles into Florida. The United States would never put up with that. Neither should Israel. Nor does it bolster the Gaza Palestinians’ case that in 2006, they chose a terrorist organization that advocates the state of Israel’s demise — Hamas — to lead them. Reportedly the latter has made an overture — 10 years of relative restraint in exchange for some 50 Palestinian prisoners and a full reopening of border crossings. Like their previous land-for-peace concessions, the Israelis probably would come to regret it.

Mostly for that reason — how can you negotiate with someone who desires your extinction and will stand for nothing short of it? — we’ve all but surrendered on the idea that peace by any reasonable definition or a two-state solution in that part of the Middle East is possible, at least in our lifetimes. About the best that can be hoped for is a state of non-war.

Obviously, that is not the situation at present.

We lament the loss of life that now seems sure to come, especially among innocents, and hope for a shortlived conflict of the all-out variety. If the world including the United States can play a constructive role to pre-empt that, well, it should try, though it seems best not to get hopes up. Naive though it may be, we’d still like to think that someday leaders will emerge on both sides who are weary of all this.